GOP to invite Dems to join in reading of the Constitution

By
Greg Sargent

After taking heat for their plan to read the Consitution on the House floor, House Republicans will send out a letter to the whole House membership tonight -- Dems included -- inviting them to participate in Thursday's reading of the founding document, aides tell me.

The GOP leadership has extended a direct invitation to the Dem leadership along these lines too, I'm told.

The "dear colleague" letter inviting Dems and Republicans alike to join in the reading will go out later from the office of GOP Rep. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, who has been organizing the reading for the GOP leadership, his spokesperson, Kathryn Rexrode, confirms.

It's unclear whether this is the result of criticism of the plan from Dems, who have spent the past few days blasting it as a sop to the Tea Party and a blatant effort to paint the GOP as the only real adherents to the Constitution.

Dem Rep. Brad Sherman of California, for instance, has been privately prodding the GOP leadership to grant Dems equal time for the reading, he tells me, on the grounds that failure to do so would make it clear the GOP's real goal is to "send a message that Republicans care about the Constitution and Democrats don't."

There are still several unanswered questions: Will Dems get to read precisely the portions they choose? How will time be alloted? Will an equal number of Dems and Republicans be allowed to participate? How will the Dem leadership response?

All that said, Dems should seize this opportunity in a general sense. As I argued here yesterday, Dems should welcome an open debate about the Constitution and the country's founding, because it affords an opportunity to undercut the case that contemporary conservatives and Tea Partyers are somehow more in sync with the founding generation than the rest of us can claim to be.

This but of Fireside Theater, or theater of the absurd will be quite short, (there really isn't all that much to the Constitution. A Solemn Reading of the Passion on Palm Sunday would take longer)

But It will of nature have to cover certain clauses that the Republicans like to ignore in their day to day interpretations of the document. Especially galling will be the articles creating the Executive and the Judiciary, and the 14th amendment, which declares their refusal to extend the debt ceiling to be acceptable ONLY if they have a fully balanced budget that can pay for EVERYTHING, including paying on the national debt.

Essentially, if they don't raise the debt limit, they HAVE to raise taxes a bunch.

Were I a Rep I would have a great deal of office organization to do during this Oratorio.

Republicans know they can't really serve corporate interests unless they get the White House back. They have to mark time with choreography, a tableau here, a posture there, so as not to acknowledge the fact that they did not win the political upper hand in November and to divert attention from the equally important fact, they have no leadership, the Party organization is a train wreck and their slate of candidates for 2012 is a punch line. Sorry for the run on sentence, multitasking's a female dog.

The Dems need to leave the stage to the Republicans for the next coup[le weeks. The R's seem hell bent on acting very badly, why is a question. John Kasich has decided that he will be inaugurated at home, no press allowed because of security concerns about his wife and kids. His days on Wall Street have gone to his head. The R's intend to vote, sans discussion, on their tantrum bill repealing HCR. Boehner is going to cut $100 billion out of Obama's overdue budget.

This kind of stage craft needs to be left entirely to the R's because it is definitely going to make them look really really puerile. The Dems need to look like adults dropping their kindergartners off for the first day of school.

Yeah, Greg. I agree that it is politically necessary, but I also tire of the dancing the the dance Republicans order up.

But if it makes some folks aware that the Constitution belongs to ALL Americans, I guess that is a good thing. Certainly it couldn't hurt. It just seems so... superfluous. But I guess that's the nature of Congress these days.

I still think they should form break out sessions for the study of the Federalist Papers, some of Jefferson's letters and the like. The groups should be charge with electing a person to collate the opinions of their group and put together a digest with recommendations for further study on points of contention. In this way, they might be forced to go back to work.

Why should Republicans be inviting Democrats to a reading of the Constitution when it is only their 'interpretation' that counts?

This is just more posturing from the party that isn't in power. All incoming newbies of the, what was it?, Tea thing, have already been swept up by the Republican Establishment, surrounded by corporate lobbyists. For those who thought there was going to be this great big change, so what's a little demo going to hurt by reading the Constitution?

Reading Mr Sargents latest smarm-o-gram I wonder what happened to all the calls for bipartisanship. by seeing everything that the Republicans do as the manifestation of some nefarious plot, Mr Sargent not only stirs the pot but insures that his camp followers have a splendid time.

As to the debt ceiling, I think tough talk about it is just the thing. Here's a quote I think the Republicans should rely upon during the looming battle:

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

I have little doubt that Mr Sargent knows the origins of the words quoted above. They would never have made it into one of his blog posts however. So I thought I'd share them. They are just so appropos of today's environment.

Tough talk about raising the debt ceiling is perfect. I, for one, have no problem shutting down the government. NONE. I can imagine how stricken the liberals will knowing that the folks who were scheduled to attend the Dept of Agriculture meeting about the difference between Extra Large and Jumbo eggs will be out of work.

I wonder too what a shut down of a couple of weeks will do to the coffers of the public sector unions.

One can only assume that republicons got part way into practicing the Preamble and realized they did not know how to pronounce the big words like "posterity"

Democrats should politely inform in a very public letter, say in a full page ad in every major new outlet in the nation, that they have already read the Constitution many times, the President has taught Constitutional Law in University, and if republicons have not read it they should be very ashamed of themsleves and resign immediately.

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

...

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

If they truly wanted to demonstrate understanding of the constitution, they would take the same test that immigrants take to become citizens. I bet most of them would fail. This just another political ploy.

How dissappointed are the baggers going to be when they find on their first time hearing our Constitution that it does not mention God, Christ, Christian, Jesus, Christianity, Christian Nation, and that the only two times religion is mentioned in the entiore document is to keep govenrment and religion separated -- no religious tests for office, and the establishment/free exercise clauses? Man are they going to be even more confused or what??? They are going to be on the crazy town right winger blogs claiming that there was a liberal conspiracy to strip religion out of the Constitution.....

If they truly wanted to demonstrate understanding of the constitution, they would take the same test that immigrants take to become citizens. I bet most of them would fail. This just politics as usual.

How dissappointed are the baggers going to be when they find on their first time hearing our Constitution that it does not mention God, Christ, Christian, Jesus, Christianity, Christian Nation, and that the only two times religion is mentioned in the entiore document is to keep govenrment and religion separated -- no religious tests for office, and the establishment/free exercise clauses? Man are they going to be even more confused or what??? They are going to be on the crazy town right winger blogs claiming that there was a liberal conspiracy to strip religion out of the Constitution.....

And then when they're done with their stagecraft-qua-witchcraft-qua-bipartisany constitutionals, Booner with his tears like orange juice, Reid sniffling and toasting with his frail ex-boxer's fist, then have another media go at it, this time have Obama stagecraft his own Consitution reading, after all, he is there to remind us the President and the Congress are two different things and he has so little power over these unruly political simpleton deviant children that run Congress, and the President's reading can feature his own public guests also reading in turn, a read-along, and Obama's turn is between readings by Pastor Warren and Lt. Dan Choi, proving that he is the true bi-partisan. O great day, soon we will all get along reading the Constitution. We will remember, we are Americans, and that is more important than the sum of our factions, just like Israel is always greater than the sum of its factions because theirs is a tie made in blood.

You guys want to really cause trouble? A massive reading by the public, for the public, of the Constitution against the cartels hiding behind both sides of the political aisle. The masses reading the Constitution to the bank cartel like the Fr. reading the bible to the possessed one in Exorcist. Oh well, one can dream, can't one, even if the nightmare is very real?

Now that you have some actual power again (the House) you won't be able to get away with spending all of your time throwing verbal bombs at the Dems, going golfing at the whites only country club and then hitting the DC cocktail circuit at night every day. You either CREATE JOBS or you will be gone in 2012 so fast that your heads will spin.

Whomever the republicans chose to read aloud the constitution, I hope they get individuals who can read well, and read in a well modulated voice. So often when those in congress read aloud, you can tell they barely ever read aloud, and it shows.

Whomever the republicans chose to read aloud the constitution, I hope they get individuals who can read well, and read in a well modulated voice. So often when those in congress read aloud, you can tell they barely ever read aloud, and it shows.

As it stands, the insurers set up a monopoly via consolidation. But a free market theory doesn't involve monopoly violating an anti-trust law.

1. Premise A : Human health is like commodity.

Without ACA, health costs will skyrocket, leading to more personal, corporate, and governmental bankruptcy.
Under historical interpretations of the Constitution, Congress can dictate the economic activity of citizens so long as that activity will have profound, large-scale effects on the national economy.

2. Premise B : Human health is a fundamental human right.

The ACA has no problem with the constitution.

3. Confronting this simple truth, the U.S. has lost too many invaluable lives to unnecessary deaths.
I understand that lack of safety net, peace of mind has led to the unusual mental illness, obesity pandemic.
( To forget the uncertainty, many have a tendency to resort to "keep eating", and eating too much tends to prompt depression, mental illness, obesity )

"The Clean Air Act clearly says that its regulation and enforcement is to be the realm of state and local governments."

No it doesn't; this is a lie. The Clean Air Act says the states are free to create their own programs only if they meet certain minimum standards defined by the federal government.

The past never happened to the GOP posters on this site. Dick Cheney never said deficits don't matter. Bush wasn't President when the bank bail out was voted on. Reagan and Bush Jr. didn't drive up the deficit. The GOP Presidents didn't seek to overthrow heads of state. The GOP congress never gives money to their favorite interest groups just because those interest groups back them in elections. The GOP congress isn't finding other ways to get earmarks to their districs. The Tea Party elected congressmen aren't whining about not getting all of their government goodies. Yeah right!

What a collection of arrogant jerks!!! Why do the Republicans think they are the only ones to read the constitution. While the parties may not agree as to the meaning of certain clauses, it does not nean the Democrats have not read the constitution. Both Democratic and Republican administrations have had the Supreme Court throw out laws because they were deemed to be unconstitutional. George Bush - Junior and Senior - and Ronald Reagan had laws thrown out because those Republicans supported laws were found to be unconstitutional. Did Ronald Reagan hold the constitution in disregard? These fools in the House think we are all as foolish as they.

A political stunt which is faltering. I work in a school, read the history textbooks almost every day with the complete Constitution in it; I read that a lot too. So do tons of others: students, teachers, citizens, etc. Can we have this new Congress grow up? Overexposure to that document could get really boring, especially defending all the really old stuff. Congress should focus on doing the job that the Constitution says it should do, including the elastic clause at the end of Article 1.

Posted by: clawrence12
*************************************
I suggest you read Jefferson's letters - they make it quite clear that Christianity isn't to be preferred over anything else.
I quote .....

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.

-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom

RainForestRising, I just read your post against the repeal of DADT. Do you not read my posts. DADT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. What part of this do you not understand? Read it again. DADT is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. I am disgusted to read posts from ignorant little twits like you. You display your ignorance with every word you write. And I have had enough of it.

Now considering that there are 2 majority/minority leaders, and 432 other members of the House, this totals up to a grand scam of $36,500 an hour for them to do this reading. If it takes you 10 hours to read it, that will cost $365,000.

What a waste of money. If you don't know what the constitution says, I suggest you do your homework at night and get down to business during the day.

10 hours? All of those positions are salaried, so it doesn't matter if they read aloud or just take the afternoon off after getting sworn in. But, I'm glad you are this focused. I wish that Michelle Obama was as concerned about her wasteful spending.

As long as they read the Constitution (1787 version PLUS all the ammendments), this is fine. I would add a preamble to the reading exercise, that clarifies that the original articles (1776) called for a Confederacy that failed, and therefore required the Constitution which created a strong federal government that rules above the states.

"which created a strong federal government that rules above the states"

No, you're simply wrong. The federal government dos not "rule above the states." The Constitution and federal laws that are constitutional are the "supreme law," but the states retain their sovereignty and sole authority in all but the limited areas delegated to Congress.

Without ACA, health costs will skyrocket, leading to more personal, corporate, and governmental bankruptcy.
Under historical interpretations of the Constitution, Congress can dictate the economic activity of citizens so long as that activity will have profound, large-scale effects on the national economy.

2. Premise B : Human health is a fundamental human right.

The ACA has no problem with the constitution. "

To call "human health" either a commodity or a "right" is patent nonsense. Perhaps you mean "health care."

Health care costs will skyrocket just because you assert it?

"Congress can dictate the economic activity of citizens so long as that activity will have profound, large-scale effects on the national economy."

This is a wild misstatement even of the precedents most favorable to ACA.

You need not worry about your B option, because the Constitution does not make health or health care a right. The idea of positive entitlements as rights is completely contrary to the Constitution. And, yes, even SCOTUS has held that the Constitution doesn't grant positive welfare "rights." Obama has lamented this very fact.

And this is what the newly elected house thinks is a good expenditure, haggling over a reading of the Constitution and who gets to read what? I originally thought this was a good idea as it was clear during the elections that most of the Tea Party candidates had no idea what was in the Constitution, but now they are on our dime and this is just ludicrous.

What did anyone expect from Republicans? They will have their morning prayer, they will say the pledge of allegiance and they will read the Constitution. Then they will all go to a fancy luncheon where lobbyists will pay them $2,500 for the privilege of eating rubber chicken with them. Then and only then, will they get down to the serious business of re-naming more post offices.

Democrats, unite for a common purpose in this, our national crisis: to dissipate the propaganda that is created from the Republican Hydra; to create innovative leadership that includes functionally addressing unemployment, a rapidly failing infrastructure, a morally deteriorated banking industry, diminished availability of loans for small businesses: the old lifeblood of capitalism and free enterprise, a mind-boggling deficit, the good sense to return light manufacturing back to US cities, creating a pool of health care providers by offering quid pro quo federal student loan forgiveness for 5 years of national service for MDs, DOs, RNs, CNPs, psychologists, dentists, physical therapists...get a New Deal going and create a pool of unemployed technical professionals to rebuild America...get out of this expensive military-industrial war in Afghanistan and find a way for diplomacy (war by other means) to effect needed change...pull up your collaborative sleeves, stop the infighting and unite!! Through these actions, the Republican Hydra will look fatuous and their 'real politik' uncovered as deeply insincere and duplicitous.

I think it should be MANDATORY that ALL Congress members be present at the reading of our Constitution and its Amendments before EVERY new session of Congress. We have Congressional members who (at least when they were campaigning) didn't know much about the Constitution at ALL, so OBVIOUSLY have never read it!

It might help in having a more "educated" Congress and make them THINK and try to do RIGHT, instead of only politicking for futeure votes and positions! The corporate Lobby (BRIBERY) games should be abolished too!

CocoLopez, you do agree at least that the phrase "separation of church and state" will not be read aloud tomorrow as part of the First Amendment, right?

More details from Rep. Goodlatte (R-Starbucks): the reading will start at 10:30 a.m., is expected to take one to two hours only, and all Members of Congress are invited to read on a first come first serve basis.

Ah, there it is! We now get to recognize the Constitutional bashers and thus the process of identifying the anti American attitudes of people in high places. Socialist will be especially offended by the reading of the Constitution, as will the liberals who think it is nothing more than a piece of paper used to wipe ones exterior upon. This is the opportunity of a life time to identify those who need to be purged from political life as the enemy of a free society based upon individual motivation and success. We cannot allow the (progress) socialist to succeed in the establishment of their new order of dependence upon government for all things of life. So, list the bashers and remember who they are on election day.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.